Not sure where you read that, but it doesn't say anything about U152 carrying IE to Iberia. Nor does it say anywhere that L23 or L51 are excluded from bringing IE to Italy.

Probably you haven’t written that part of the paper (and probably you haven’t read it later) but the 3 notes to the passage I quoted are20,21,22i.e. 20.Mallory JP, Adams DQ (1997) Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture. Londonand Chicago: Fitzroy-Dearborn.21. Koch JT (2006) Celtic Culture: A Historical Encyclopedia. Anta Barbara: ABCCLIO.22. Koch JT (2009) A case for Tartessian as a Celtic language. Palaeohispanica 9:339–351.then the theory of the origin of the Iberian Celt Languages (Tartessian, Lusitanian) from Italy, being linked to the Celt of Italy (Ligurian) and not to the Celt of France or elsewhere (these languages conserve the *p- that the other Celt languages have lost, etc.). That the IE languages may have been carried to Iberia from France (the idea you like, I don’t know why) doesn’t explain why Iberian Celt is linked with Ligurian and not with the Celt of France and we don’t understand why Italy hasn’t practically R-L21, which arose probably in France and was carried to the Isles etc. etc.Widen your glance also to mtDNA and to other Y-haplogroup as I have done from many years, and everything will be clear to you too.

It is Lusitanian to retain it, and this demonstrates that Celt languages of France and of the Isles derive from a language developed in Iberia, whereas Ligurian retained always the *p-, if the river Polcevera derives from *porķo-bhera, and that the Celt of Iberia derives from Ligurian and in very ancient times is reinforced. These are the conclusions of Koch 2009:

“It is sometimes possible to interpret these texts as continuous funerary statements in an Ancient Celtic language, favouring the conclusion that Celtic is the language of the southwestern inscriptions, rather than another language with isolated Celtic names […] That general conclusion could carry important implications for historians and archaeologists. It reinforces something we have known for some time, namely that the Celtic languages in the Iberian Peninsula—possibly unlike those of Gaul and Britain—cannot be explained as the result of the spread of the La Tène and Hallstatt archaeological cultures of the central European Iron Age. To find Celtic extensively used so far to the south-west at such an early date must also call into question the relevance of Hallstatt’s Late Bronze Age forerunner, the Urnfield cultures, in the Celticization of the Peninsula. The immediate background and context of the earliest attested Celtic language appears, instead, to be the Atlantic Late Bronze Age, a conclusion broadly resonant with ideas expressed by Almagro (e.g. 1995), as well as the new theories concerning the origins of the Celtic languages of Cunliffe (2001) and Brun (2006)”.

Liguria is an interesting prospect for many things. I think the range and scope of Ligurian influence is far wider than it appears to be. Clearly Liguria stretched well across the northern Pyrenees to reach the Atlantic coast prior to the arrival of the Celts. How the Aquitani, Ligurians, Iberians and Etruscans to the southeast were towards each other, I have no idea.

Liguria is an interesting prospect for many things. I think the range and scope of Ligurian influence is far wider than it appears to be. Clearly Liguria stretched well across the northern Pyrenees to reach the Atlantic coast prior to the arrival of the Celts. How the Aquitani, Ligurians, Iberians and Etruscans to the southeast were towards each other, I have no idea.

Arch

Indeed, Liguria is interesting. as for the relationships of those peoples, I think the only one of them that is widely accepted as having spoke IE is the Ligurians.

Congrats to the team! I think the reason why this team makes such good progress is for one the determination and dedication of it's administrators. They are diligent in asking participants to test when needed.

@ Rich, is there anymore info regarding DYS492=14 in Italy? I was looking at the Z144,145,146 cluster chart on the FTDNA site and I saw people from Ireland however all were a 12 at DYS492. The other person I saw from Italy was also 12, mine was blank where it should read 14..

That last post was from me Diana. Looks like my husband logged me out! I am so used to being logged in.

Congrats to the team! I think the reason why this team makes such good progress is for one the determination and dedication of it's administrators. They are diligent in asking participants to test when needed.

@ Rich, is there anymore info regarding DYS492=14 in Italy? I was looking at the Z144,145,146 cluster chart on the FTDNA site and I saw people from Ireland however all were a 12 at DYS492. The other person I saw from Italy was also 12, mine was blank where it should read 14..

That last post was from me Diana. Looks like my husband logged me out! I am so used to being logged in.

Congrats to the team! I think the reason why this team makes such good progress is for one the determination and dedication of it's administrators. They are diligent in asking participants to test when needed.

@ Rich, is there anymore info regarding DYS492=14 in Italy? I was looking at the Z144,145,146 cluster chart on the FTDNA site and I saw people from Ireland however all were a 12 at DYS492. The other person I saw from Italy was also 12, mine was blank where it should read 14..

That 2 step split must be an important indicator..?

Thank you"

Thanks Diana. DYS492=14 is the defining value for Z56 and all of its subclades and I would say the odds of anyone with that value being U152 and Z56 are 99.9%. So yes, it is pretty important. There is no doubt that when you upgrade to 67 markers, you will be DYS492=14 as well.

This article has some nice background information on the paper. I have posted links to the key diagrams on the Celtic Migrations (DNA) section of my Pinterest board:

"The team has addressed this problem by downloading human genome data obtained by the 1000 Genomes Project from the Sanger Centre in Cambridge. Then, working on their home computers, they managed to extract 200 novel genetic variants from Y chromosomes of the most numerous group of western European men.

By determining the patterns of these markers in each of the 1000 Genomes Project samples, the team was able to draw up a new family tree for the majority of men in Western Europe.

The group hopes that this resource will allow a much more detailed analysis of migration and expansion of populations in Europe. For example, some of the new genetic markers may help to study the origins and movements of different historical and cultural groups such as the Celts."